|
|
|
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ / v.23, no.1, 1995³â, pp.7-22
|
Appleton°ú BourassaÀÇ ¡Ç°æ°ü¹ÌÇСÇÀ̷п¡ ´ëÇÑ ºñÆÇÀû °íÂû
( Theory in the Aesthetics of Landscape: A criticar neview of J, Appleton and S. Bourassa ) |
| ¹èÁ¤ÇÑ;Á¶Á¤¼Û; ¼¿ï´ëÇϱ³ Á¶°æÇаú ¹Ú»ç°úÁ¤ ¼ö·á;¼¿ï´ëÇб³ Á¶°æÇаú;
|
|
|
 |
|
| |
| ÃÊ ·Ï |
|
|
| Philosophers Of aeBthetics have tended to limit their Suhject to include only objects Of art. In contrast to art objects, landscapes include elements of both art and nature, and the aesthetic experiences of landscape are ordinarty ones. Thus, the theoretical alternatives, that cannot be like the traditional aesthetic dogma of art, must be explored. Jay Appleton's theory is the firsts attempt to develop a comprehensive theory of landscape aesthetics. He concentrates on the question 'what do we like about landscape and why do we like it ' He takes the assumption that the aesthetic experience of landscape is pleasurable or satisfying, and suggests the biologically oriented theory, called 'prospect-refuge theory.'Although his theory is stimulating and highly speculative, it depends on the 'aesthetic attitude' theory of Kantian thought. His theory can be criticized for its biologically deterministic nature and its reductionism To respond to Appleton's shortcomings, that is, to resolve the conflict between biological and cultural explanations of aesthetic experience of landscape, Steven Bourassa tries to combine biological, cultural, and personal modes in a comprehensive paradigm for research in landscape aesthetics. This tripartite paradigm seems to promise to be meaningful if helping to pose important questions as well as in. avoiding conceptual errors about aesthetic domain of landscape. However, Bourassa's theory fails to integrate such three separate kinds of moder In the final analysis both Appleton and Bourassa present same succeases in expanding the scope of aesthetics to embrace landscape. Most important for a theory in landscape aesthetics must be its ability to enlarge our awareness of the aesthetic domain and its sound logic and evidence to criticize our problematic beliefs about he aesthetic idea of landscape. |
| |
| Ű¿öµå |
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸÁö / v.23, no.1, 1995³â, pp.7-22
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1225-1755
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO199511920951341)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î |
|
| ³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø |
|
|
|
|
|
|